Peter Espeut IN THE 1970s and 1980s Jamaica had a choice between two political parties with stated ideological differences. The PNP claimed to support democratic socialism (which is supposed to mean that the workers are primary), and the JLP espoused the conservative capitalist ideology (which fundamentally supports the interests of the owners of capital). These labels may not mean much, for the JLP calls itself a labour party and the PNP is a party of middle class ideologues.
These ideological labels masked a remarkable sameness between the two parties, which now that the ideology and rhetoric has dissipated, is apparent to most people. Tweedledum and Tweedledee, I say. This sameness is unfortunate, because it doesn't give Jamaicans much of a choice at the polls. The difference is in the names and faces, not in the policies or approach to politics.
Both the PNP and the JLP have political garrisons, and depend upon their respective Dons to confirm political support. Neither party is willing to campaign based on putting an end to garrison politics. No matter which one wins, garrisons and Dons will be with us for a long while. Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
Both the PNP and JLP believe in awarding public contracts to their political friends as a reward for political contributions. Neither party wants transparency in donations they receive both to protect the identity of their patrons and to hide the link between the tit and the tat, the "donation" and the favour. In other countries this is called bribery, graft and corruption. In Jamaica it is called politics. No matter which one wins, bribery, graft and corruption will be with us for a long while. Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
Both the PNP and JLP believe that "independent" and "bi-partisan" are synonyms. Both believe in the concentration of executive political power in the hands of one man the Prime Minister because both look forward to their leader enjoying that power. Both support the appointment of the Governor-General by the Prime Minister after consultation with the Leader of the Oppos-ition. Both support the appointment of party faithfuls to various services commissions, boards and authorities with or without consultation, thereby controlling their activities. Both pay scant regard or lip service to the views of civil society not aligned to party politics. No matter which party wins, a top-down approach to governance and a monarchical Prime Minister will be with us for a long while. Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
Both the PNP and the JLP believe in subjecting the environment to the depredations of "development". Neither party is prepared to say NO to investors (some of whom are contributors to the party) who wish to make profit out of activities which are inimical to the health of the environment. In the battle between the environment and unsustainable development, the Minister of the Environment advocates for unsustainable development, and the JLP spokesman on the environment is nowhere to be seen or heard. (I wonder how many of my readers know who the JLP spokesman for the environment is?) No matter which party wins, we can expect a marginalisation of environmental concerns, the advance of unsustainable activities, and further degradation of Jamaica's national natural patrimony. Tweedle-dum and Tweedledee!
I could go on. What the PNP and JLP have done is polarise Jamaica into two tribes, and each takes turns to rape the resources of the country. If you want to get ahead in life, you have to join one or the other, or contribute to one or the other, and wait your turn at the gang-bang. Stand on the sidelines and watch, and you will end up poor and marginalised.
Even the so-called third parties are polarised: the NDM and the UPP are seen by many as disillusioned JLP and PNP supporters. The polls still show JLP supporters wanting former head of the NDM, Bruce Golding, to lead their party; and Mrs. Cardenas is on record as saying that the PNP has lost their way and that the UPP is going to be true to the ideals of Norman Washington Manley, the founder of the PNP. We are so polarised as a nation that we cannot even invent a genuine third political party!
But as I said above, our polarisation is not now ideological. It is about who gets what, when and how. It is about power and the access to wealth which power brings. Either Tweedle-dum or Tweedledee will be on the throne, and the pants of their retinues will either be falling off, or cotched up under their beer-bellies; and those who follow neither are true nowhereians.
But if the polls are to be believed, the numbers of nowhereians are increasing. Increasing numbers of us have eschewed the system created by Tweedledum and Tweedledee for their serial advantage. As more and more Jamaicans choose not to vote rather than support Tweedledum or Tweedledee, Jamaica is fast becoming an oligocracy and a plutocracy. The number who choose not to register or vote (they are really voting against the system) is greater than the votes counted in the ballot boxes (some of which are bogus) cast for all the parties combined. Tweedledum and Tweedledee should be suitably embarrassed, but if garrisons and dons and graft and corruption and polarisation and environmental degradation don't embarrass them, I don't see why the death of democracy should.
Peter Espeut is a sociologist and is executive director of an environment and development NGO.
